KHAGENDRA KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire departmental proceeding initiated against him by Resolution No. 603 dated 5.3.2004 (Annexure 5) being the second successive enquiry despite the exoneration of the petitioner as far back as in the year 1993, and also for directing the respondents to act in accordance with the enquiry report submitted by letter No. 1452 dated 5.7.2004 (Annexure 6) whereby even in such subsequent enquiry the charges levelled against him could not be proved by the Enquiry Officer. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an amendment petition during the pendency of this writ application which was allowed and by which he has further prayed for quashing the Memo No. 603 dated 5.3.2004 (Annexure 7) whereby the concerned respondents in stead of acting on the basis of the enquiry report submitted in the second enquiry, took a decision to initiate fresh enquiry (third enquiry) by appointing another Enquiry Officer.

(2.) THE fact of the case in short is that the petitioner was appointed in class II cadre of the Bihar Education Service, on the recommendation of Bihar Public Service Commission in the year, 1985. After completing training, he was posted as Principal of Teachers' Training School, Sasaram in 1986 where he was also given charge of Sub -Divisional Education Officer (SDEO). The petitioner was then transferred to the post of District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad in the year 1991. At the time of reorganization of the State, he was posted as Deputy Director, Higher Education, Patna. Thereafter he was transferred to Jharkhandon 12.12.2001. After his transfer to the State of Jharkhand he was kept waiting for posting for about four months and thereafter was posted as Regional Deputy Director of Education (RDDE), Santhal Pargana at Dumka where he joined on 20.4.2002 and subsequently in June, 2004 he was transferred and posted as Officer on Special Duty (OSD), Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi. While the petitioner was posted as District Superintendent of Education, Aurangabad, he was served with a charge -sheet in 'Prapatra Ka' vide letter No. 92 dated 30.7.1992 containing article of charges alleging, inter alia, that he as a member of the appointment committee had connived with the then D.E.O., Sasaram (Mr. K.N. Sharma) in making irregular appointments of clerk and peon (Class III and IV posts) and had helped Sri Sharma in serving his self and for such serious indiscipline why the petitioner be not dismissed from service (Annexure 1). The petitioner submitted his written reply denying the charges and stating, inter alia, that he was not at all involved in the process of appointment and he is not guilty of any charge and proceeding against him is fit to be dropped. After considering the said explanation of the petitioner, an order was issued by Memo No. 107 dated 13.5.1993 from Human Resources Deve - lopment Department, Government of Bihar under the signature of Deputy Secretary, mentioning therein that the charges against the petitioner have not been proved and the Government has taken decision to exonerate him from the charges (Annexure 2). The petitioner, thereafter, was given promotion to the junior selection grade by a notification dated 2.11.1999 (Annexure 3). However, the A.D.M., Rohtas had lodged an FIR against the petitioner without obtaining prior sanction from the Department being Sasaram P.S. Case No. 601/1991. The sanction was subsequently granted by Memo No. 9389 dated 9.7.2002 by the State of Bihar which has been challenged in the Patna High Court in Cr. Misc. No. 4372/2004 which is still pending. After the petitioner was allotted Jharkhand cadre, the Government of Jharkhand by its Memo No. 603 dated 5.3.2004 hastened to initiate a fresh departmental proceeding by serving memo of charges (Annexure 5) by reopening the matter, which was closed by exonerating the petitioner long ago. The petitioner filed reply and brought everything to the notice of the Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer thereafter again inquired into the charges and also took note of the earlier records and submitted his report by letter No. 1452 dated 2.7.2004 with a finding that the charges against the petitioner could not be proved. In spit of the said finding of the Enquiry Officer, the concerned respondent did not pass any final order. The petitioner then took resort of this Court for the reliefs as first above mentioned. However, during the pendency of this writ application, the respondents issued an order by Memo No. 603 dated 5.3.2004 (Annexure 7) whereby third round of the enquiry has been sought to be initiated against the petitioner on same self charges by appointing a fresh Enquiry Officer which has been assailed by way of amendment in the writ application.

(3.) IN reply to the interlocutory application by which it was sought to assail the order passed during the pendency of the writ application, for a fresh enquiry by appointing another Enquiry Officer, it has been stated that the erstwhile State of Bihar did not initiate any departmental proceeding rather only an explanation was called for from the petitioner; and as such the departmental proceeding was initiated by the State of Jharkhand by Resolution No. 603 dated 5.3.2004 and the then Director, Secondary Education, Mr. B.K. Sahu, IAS, was appointed as Conducting Officer and Shri S.K. Verma as Presenting Officer. The Conducting Officer then concluded the enquiry and submitted his report with the finding that the charges against the petitioner were not proved for want of relevant papers (Annexure 6). The said report was examined at the Government level and it has been decided that the charges are serious in nature and the same require further enquiry after procuring relevant records from the Government of Bihar, and for that purpose a Deputy Secretary of Human Resources Department has been deputed to collect the relevant records and in the light thereof a fresh enquiry has been ordered against the petitioner by Memo No. 3 dated 3.1.2005 (Annexure -B).